Constitution

Pope Leo XIV responds to letter from victims of Minab girls’ school strike in Iran #Catholic Pope Leo XIV echoed his calls for dialogue and peace between the United States and Iran while expressing grief over the deaths of innocent children killed in a military attack that struck a girls’ elementary school in Minab, Iran.The Holy Father offered these comments April 23 after he received a letter from parents of girls who died in the strike. More than 150 people were killed in the Feb. 28 strike, which the Defense Department says it is investigating.“I have just seen a letter from families of children who were killed on the first day of the attack,” Leo said while speaking to journalists on a flight back to Rome after visiting four countries in Africa, according to the Vatican-run Vatican News.“They speak about how they have lost their children, who died in that event,” he said. “The issue is not whether there is regime change or not; the issue is how to promote the values we believe in without the death of so many innocent people.”Leo called the situation in Iran “complex” amid the ongoing ceasefire, stating that “one day Iran says yes and the United States says no, and vice versa.” The pope warned: “We do not know where things are heading.”“This chaotic, critical situation for the global economy has been created, but there is also an entire population in Iran of innocent people suffering because of this war,” he said. “So, on regime change, yes or no: It is not even clear what regime currently exists after the first days of attacks by Israel and the United States on Iran.”“Rather, I would encourage the continuation of dialogue for peace, that all sides make every effort to promote peace, remove the threat of war, and respect international law,” he said. “It is very important that innocent people are protected, as has not happened in several places.”The letter from the parents of the victims was published in full by a reporter for Press TV, which is operated by the Iranian government. The letter is written in Farsi.According to a partial English translation on Press TV, the parents said the pontiff’s consistent advocacy for peace “offered a healing touch to our broken hearts.”“Today, instead of feeling the warmth of our children’s embrace, we are left to hold onto their charred bags and bloody journals,” the letter said, according to the translation.“Our children will never return home to build a brighter future, but it is the prayer of us grieving parents that your message to ‘lay down the weapons’ be heard, at a time when the United States and the Israeli regime fuel the flames of these atrocities with their excessive demands,” it added.When asked for comment, the Defense Department pointed EWTN News to comments made by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on April 24 when asked about the pope’s comment on Iran.“We know what our mission is,” he said. “We know what authority we have. Weʼre very clear about that. We follow the orders of the president.”“Weʼve got lawyers all over the place, looking at what weʼre doing and why weʼre doing it, and giving us every authority necessary under the Constitution and under our laws to execute it,” he added. “So we feel very confident across the spectrum about what weʼre doing and why weʼre doing it, and the legal justification that weʼre following in order to do it.”A Defense Department official told EWTN News that the strike on the school in Minab “is currently under investigation” and “more details will be provided [when] they become available.” The Pentagon has not claimed responsibility for the strike.
Read More

Pope Leo XIV responds to letter from victims of Minab girls’ school strike in Iran #Catholic Pope Leo XIV echoed his calls for dialogue and peace between the United States and Iran while expressing grief over the deaths of innocent children killed in a military attack that struck a girls’ elementary school in Minab, Iran.The Holy Father offered these comments April 23 after he received a letter from parents of girls who died in the strike. More than 150 people were killed in the Feb. 28 strike, which the Defense Department says it is investigating.“I have just seen a letter from families of children who were killed on the first day of the attack,” Leo said while speaking to journalists on a flight back to Rome after visiting four countries in Africa, according to the Vatican-run Vatican News.“They speak about how they have lost their children, who died in that event,” he said. “The issue is not whether there is regime change or not; the issue is how to promote the values we believe in without the death of so many innocent people.”Leo called the situation in Iran “complex” amid the ongoing ceasefire, stating that “one day Iran says yes and the United States says no, and vice versa.” The pope warned: “We do not know where things are heading.”“This chaotic, critical situation for the global economy has been created, but there is also an entire population in Iran of innocent people suffering because of this war,” he said. “So, on regime change, yes or no: It is not even clear what regime currently exists after the first days of attacks by Israel and the United States on Iran.”“Rather, I would encourage the continuation of dialogue for peace, that all sides make every effort to promote peace, remove the threat of war, and respect international law,” he said. “It is very important that innocent people are protected, as has not happened in several places.”The letter from the parents of the victims was published in full by a reporter for Press TV, which is operated by the Iranian government. The letter is written in Farsi.According to a partial English translation on Press TV, the parents said the pontiff’s consistent advocacy for peace “offered a healing touch to our broken hearts.”“Today, instead of feeling the warmth of our children’s embrace, we are left to hold onto their charred bags and bloody journals,” the letter said, according to the translation.“Our children will never return home to build a brighter future, but it is the prayer of us grieving parents that your message to ‘lay down the weapons’ be heard, at a time when the United States and the Israeli regime fuel the flames of these atrocities with their excessive demands,” it added.When asked for comment, the Defense Department pointed EWTN News to comments made by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on April 24 when asked about the pope’s comment on Iran.“We know what our mission is,” he said. “We know what authority we have. Weʼre very clear about that. We follow the orders of the president.”“Weʼve got lawyers all over the place, looking at what weʼre doing and why weʼre doing it, and giving us every authority necessary under the Constitution and under our laws to execute it,” he added. “So we feel very confident across the spectrum about what weʼre doing and why weʼre doing it, and the legal justification that weʼre following in order to do it.”A Defense Department official told EWTN News that the strike on the school in Minab “is currently under investigation” and “more details will be provided [when] they become available.” The Pentagon has not claimed responsibility for the strike.

unitedyam

“The issue is not whether there is regime change or not; the issue is how to promote the values we believe in without the death of so many innocent people,” Pope Leo XIV said.

Read More
Quebec secularism law is ‘anti-religious ideology,’ bishops tell Canada Supreme Court #Catholic Canada’s bishops told the Supreme Court of Canada that Quebec’s secularism legislation Bill 21 “denies the divine” going well beyond provincial jurisdiction by imposing an anti-religious ideology on the province.The bishops were among more than 50 intervenors presenting arguments at a landmark Supreme Court of Canada hearing into the constitutionality of Quebec’s 2019 secularism law. The hearing, one of the longest in the court’s history, ran from March 23–26. The court reserved its decision, with a ruling expected later this year.The secularism law, which lower courts have twice upheld, prohibits certain public employees — such as teachers and police officers — from wearing religious symbols while at work.Toronto lawyer Phil Horgan, president and general counsel of the Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL), argued on behalf of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), summarizing a factum that argued the “purpose and effect” of Quebec’s legislation is to “amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”Such a “drastic” change can only be made by the federal government using its authority over criminal law or its constitutional “peace, order, and good government” powers, according to the bishops’ argument.Quebec preemptively invoked the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it drafted Bill 21 to shield it from judicial review.Federal and provincial governments can invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Constitution to temporarily prevent courts from invalidating legislation as unconstitutional.The timing and impact of the use of Charter Section 33 became a significant issue during the four days of hearings and will likely be central in the court’s analysis, Horgan told The Catholic Register.The appellants challenging Bill 21 include individual teachers directly affected by it as well as advocacy groups including the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), and the Legal Committee of the Coalition Inclusion Québec. They argue Bill 21 is “ultra vires,” beyond the powers of provincial jurisdiction.In a five-minute oral argument, Horgan told the seven justices that “Canada’s existing federal constitution is pluralist and pro-religion.” Although “the doctrine of state neutrality is well established, Canada has never adopted laicity or an absolutist separation of church and state,” he said.Justice Malcolm Rowe questioned Horgan on the point, asking: “Other than the reference to the supremacy of God in the preamble to the Charter, would you direct me to the provision in the Constitution which is pro-religion?”Horgan cited Section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which protects denominational school rights and privileges, and noted federal charity law recognizes religion as a public good.Horgan said he wasn’t concerned by the pushback, noting judges often ask questions “not so much to get the answers from counsel but to help … persuade other members of the bench on some of the merits of the argument.”In its factum, the CCCB said Bill 21 “turns the expression of religious belief, through the wearing of symbols, into something to be punished because such expression now conflicts with the dominant philosophical posture of laïcité.”Just as religious symbols are an illustration of underlying personal faith, “the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook from the provincial government that denies the divine,” the bishops said.Quebec has argued the notwithstanding clause disqualifies courts from weighing in on matters deemed political debates. Isabelle Brunet, a lawyer for the Quebec government, told the justices: “It is not up to a court to answer a question that doesn’t concern the courts.”Quebec received support from the attorneys general of Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, who maintain the courts should not interfere once the notwithstanding clause is invoked.Alberta and Ontario take a contrary position, arguing there is nothing in the notwithstanding clause that precludes judicial scrutiny of legislation.Guy J. Pratte, a lawyer for the attorney general of Canada, said Section 33 gives legislatures the power to override Charter rights but does not nullify the rights altogether or prevent judges from issuing an opinion if freedoms are violated.‘Imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology’The following excerpts are from the factum submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada by the Canadian bishops:“The purpose and effect of the act is unilaterally to amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”“When a province makes itself laïc, it is adopting a non-neutral stance on religion. The provinces do not have that power.”“Québec is attempting to impose an atheistic posture on religious believers.”“Our constitution is founded on a political theory that sees fundamental rights and freedoms as God-given. To adopt an expressly anti-religious viewpoint, as the act purports to do, is an amendment of our existing federal constitution.”“In the place of a genuinely neutral, pluralist, and pro-religious approach, the act substitutes an anti-religious constitutional settlement where symbols of religion worn by individuals are not permitted.”“Just as religious symbols manifest an underlying personal faith, the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook … that denies the divine.”This story was first published by The B.C. Catholic and is reprinted here with permission.
Read More

Quebec secularism law is ‘anti-religious ideology,’ bishops tell Canada Supreme Court #Catholic Canada’s bishops told the Supreme Court of Canada that Quebec’s secularism legislation Bill 21 “denies the divine” going well beyond provincial jurisdiction by imposing an anti-religious ideology on the province.The bishops were among more than 50 intervenors presenting arguments at a landmark Supreme Court of Canada hearing into the constitutionality of Quebec’s 2019 secularism law. The hearing, one of the longest in the court’s history, ran from March 23–26. The court reserved its decision, with a ruling expected later this year.The secularism law, which lower courts have twice upheld, prohibits certain public employees — such as teachers and police officers — from wearing religious symbols while at work.Toronto lawyer Phil Horgan, president and general counsel of the Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL), argued on behalf of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), summarizing a factum that argued the “purpose and effect” of Quebec’s legislation is to “amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”Such a “drastic” change can only be made by the federal government using its authority over criminal law or its constitutional “peace, order, and good government” powers, according to the bishops’ argument.Quebec preemptively invoked the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it drafted Bill 21 to shield it from judicial review.Federal and provincial governments can invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Constitution to temporarily prevent courts from invalidating legislation as unconstitutional.The timing and impact of the use of Charter Section 33 became a significant issue during the four days of hearings and will likely be central in the court’s analysis, Horgan told The Catholic Register.The appellants challenging Bill 21 include individual teachers directly affected by it as well as advocacy groups including the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), and the Legal Committee of the Coalition Inclusion Québec. They argue Bill 21 is “ultra vires,” beyond the powers of provincial jurisdiction.In a five-minute oral argument, Horgan told the seven justices that “Canada’s existing federal constitution is pluralist and pro-religion.” Although “the doctrine of state neutrality is well established, Canada has never adopted laicity or an absolutist separation of church and state,” he said.Justice Malcolm Rowe questioned Horgan on the point, asking: “Other than the reference to the supremacy of God in the preamble to the Charter, would you direct me to the provision in the Constitution which is pro-religion?”Horgan cited Section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which protects denominational school rights and privileges, and noted federal charity law recognizes religion as a public good.Horgan said he wasn’t concerned by the pushback, noting judges often ask questions “not so much to get the answers from counsel but to help … persuade other members of the bench on some of the merits of the argument.”In its factum, the CCCB said Bill 21 “turns the expression of religious belief, through the wearing of symbols, into something to be punished because such expression now conflicts with the dominant philosophical posture of laïcité.”Just as religious symbols are an illustration of underlying personal faith, “the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook from the provincial government that denies the divine,” the bishops said.Quebec has argued the notwithstanding clause disqualifies courts from weighing in on matters deemed political debates. Isabelle Brunet, a lawyer for the Quebec government, told the justices: “It is not up to a court to answer a question that doesn’t concern the courts.”Quebec received support from the attorneys general of Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, who maintain the courts should not interfere once the notwithstanding clause is invoked.Alberta and Ontario take a contrary position, arguing there is nothing in the notwithstanding clause that precludes judicial scrutiny of legislation.Guy J. Pratte, a lawyer for the attorney general of Canada, said Section 33 gives legislatures the power to override Charter rights but does not nullify the rights altogether or prevent judges from issuing an opinion if freedoms are violated.‘Imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology’The following excerpts are from the factum submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada by the Canadian bishops:“The purpose and effect of the act is unilaterally to amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”“When a province makes itself laïc, it is adopting a non-neutral stance on religion. The provinces do not have that power.”“Québec is attempting to impose an atheistic posture on religious believers.”“Our constitution is founded on a political theory that sees fundamental rights and freedoms as God-given. To adopt an expressly anti-religious viewpoint, as the act purports to do, is an amendment of our existing federal constitution.”“In the place of a genuinely neutral, pluralist, and pro-religious approach, the act substitutes an anti-religious constitutional settlement where symbols of religion worn by individuals are not permitted.”“Just as religious symbols manifest an underlying personal faith, the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook … that denies the divine.”This story was first published by The B.C. Catholic and is reprinted here with permission.

unitedyam

The Catholic bishops were among more than 50 intervenors presenting arguments at a landmark Supreme Court of Canada hearing into the constitutionality of Quebec’s 2019 secularism law.

Read More
In the Style of Rembrandt – recreate ‘George Washington’ By Gilbert Stuart – #AIPrompt #AIart
Read More

In the Style of Rembrandt – recreate ‘George Washington’ By Gilbert Stuart – #AIPrompt #AIart

unitedyam

After the war, Washington’s dedication to the nascent nation did not wane. He presided over the Constitutional Convention in 1787, where his support was crucial in the drafting and ratification of the U.S. Constitution. In 1789, he was unanimously elected as the first President of the United States, serving two terms and setting many precedents for the office. Washington’s presidency established the foundations of American governance, including the creation of a stable financial system, the establishment of the executive cabinet, and the tradition of a peaceful transfer of power. Retiring to his beloved Mount Vernon in 1797, he remained a symbol of national unity until his death on December 14, 1799. Washington’s legacy as a leader of integrity, courage, and vision continues to inspire generations.

Read More